SH. ANIKET SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

capital gain are a sham transaction. 39. There were various direct and circumstantial evidence available on record indicating that the prices of the shares of the impugned companies were rigged up in an organised manner by the network of the various entry-operators. All the transactions of purchase and sale of the shares of these companies on the stock exchange

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

capital gain are a sham transaction. 39. There were various direct and circumstantial evidence available on record indicating that the prices of the shares of the impugned companies were rigged up in an organised manner by the network of the various entry-operators. All the transactions of purchase and sale of the shares of these companies on the stock exchange

SH. ANIKET SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

capital gain are a sham transaction. 39. There were various direct and circumstantial evidence available on record indicating that the prices of the shares of the impugned companies were rigged up in an organised manner by the network of the various entry-operators. All the transactions of purchase and sale of the shares of these companies on the stock exchange

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

capital gain are a sham transaction. 39. There were various direct and circumstantial evidence available on record indicating that the prices of the shares of the impugned companies were rigged up in an organised manner by the network of the various entry-operators. All the transactions of purchase and sale of the shares of these companies on the stock exchange

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

capital gain are a sham transaction. 39. There were various direct and circumstantial evidence available on record indicating that the prices of the shares of the impugned companies were rigged up in an organised manner by the network of the various entry-operators. All the transactions of purchase and sale of the shares of these companies on the stock exchange

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

capital gain are a sham transaction. 39. There were various direct and circumstantial evidence available on record indicating that the prices of the shares of the impugned companies were rigged up in an organised manner by the network of the various entry-operators. All the transactions of purchase and sale of the shares of these companies on the stock exchange

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

capital gain are a sham transaction. 39. There were various direct and circumstantial evidence available on record indicating that the prices of the shares of the impugned companies were rigged up in an organised manner by the network of the various entry-operators. All the transactions of purchase and sale of the shares of these companies on the stock exchange

SH. SANJAY SINGAL HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

capital gain are a sham transaction. 39. There were various direct and circumstantial evidence available on record indicating that the prices of the shares of the impugned companies were rigged up in an organised manner by the network of the various entry-operators. All the transactions of purchase and sale of the shares of these companies on the stock exchange

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

capital gain are a sham transaction. 39. There were various direct and circumstantial evidence available on record indicating that the prices of the shares of the impugned companies were rigged up in an organised manner by the network of the various entry-operators. All the transactions of purchase and sale of the shares of these companies on the stock exchange

SHRI KRISHAN KUMAR JALAN,BANGALORE vs. ITO, W-1, SIRSA

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the search\nproceedings did not lead to recovery of any incriminating evidence to show that\nthe transaction of purchase of shares was arranged as suspected by the\nAssessing Officer. It is also seen that no post-search enquiries on the issue had\nbeen conducted in the form of recording the statement

M/S SANJAY SINGAL HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 10(38) of the Act on the gain arising from the sale of the listed shares. ITA 655/CHD/2023 & ITA 610/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2015-16 37 DEPARTMENT’S SUBMISSIONS : 8. On the other hand, the ld. DR has contended that as correctly held by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has shown the shares to have

SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 10(38) of the Act on the gain arising from the sale of the listed shares. ITA 655/CHD/2023 & ITA 610/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2015-16 37 DEPARTMENT’S SUBMISSIONS : 8. On the other hand, the ld. DR has contended that as correctly held by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has shown the shares to have

AJMER SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(5), MOHAL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

section 48 are to be made for ascertaining capital gains. Consideration as such in a given case may flow from third party. It may have been paid in the past or may be paid at the time of transfer or may be agreed to be paid in future. The date of payment of consideration is not material for accrual

ITO, W-6(5), MOHALI vs. SMT. GURDEV KAUR, KHARAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

section 48 are to be made for ascertaining capital gains. Consideration as such in a given case may flow from third party. It may have been paid in the past or may be paid at the time of transfer or may be agreed to be paid in future. The date of payment of consideration is not material for accrual

AJMER SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(5), MOHAL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

section 48 are to be made for ascertaining capital gains. Consideration as such in a given case may flow from third party. It may have been paid in the past or may be paid at the time of transfer or may be agreed to be paid in future. The date of payment of consideration is not material for accrual

SOHAN SINGH GARCHA,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptac.O. No. 39/Chd/2012 (In Ita No. 973/Chd/2012) "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 Shri Sohan Lal Garcha, Vs. The Dcit, 901/2, Punjab Mata Natar, Circle Vi, बनाम Ludhiana Ludhiana

41 & 42/Chd/2017 respectively. 4. In view of the above position, the ITA No. 1337/Chd/2016, C.O.No.39/Chd/2012 and C.O. No. 5/Chd/2013 being related to the same assessee and involving connected issues have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 5. Before taking up the appeals and Cross objections separately, we deem it fit to first narrate

M/S PURE DRINK LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE, PATIALA

Bench: Hon'Ble Chandigarh Itat Was 27Th March 2020. (Ii) It Is Submitted That Management Of Appellant Company Is Based Is Delhi. Owing To Covid-19 Pandemic Nationwide Lock Down Was Enforced By The Government From 22Nd March 2020 & Therefore The Appellant Was Unable To Physically File The Appeal Documents Before Hon'Ble Itat.

41,00,000. 7.1 The assessee also furnished the written submissions before the Ld. CIT(A) which read as under: "1. . Captioned appeal is fixed for hearing before your good-self today i.e., if1 July, 2018. It is respectfully submitted that the sole issue in dispute in this appeal is as to whether Capital Gain Tax is attracted on execution

SMT. TEENA GARG,CHANDIGARH vs. PCIT, PANCHKULA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

capital gain of Rs 2875041/- to be\nadded in income tax return u/s 69A of IT Act.\n\nFrom the above, it is clear that on the basis of material available on\nrecord, the AO has not made any addition after considering\nmaterial available on record, evidences submitted by the assessee,\ncontract notes, Demat A/c and thus AO has duly